Posted 5 years ago on Jan. 5, 2013, 8:57 p.m. EST by GirlFriday
(17435)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The threat of a strike by the ILA, which would be the first on the East Coast since 1977, sent shockwaves through big business. A group of more than 100 business owners, along with Florida Gov. Rick Scott, sent a letter in early December to President Obama, calling on him to invoke powers granted to the president in the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act that would allow him to stop the strike.

Last year alone, these 14 East and Gulf coast ports — from Boston to Baltimore; Wilmington, N.C., to Savannah, Ga.; and Miami to Houston — handled 110 million tons of cargo. In 2011, more than $208 billion worth of commodities went through the Port of New York and New Jersey, making it the biggest port on the East Coast and the third largest in the country.

At the core of the ongoing impasse in contract negotiations is the USMX’s demands for big concessions from the ILA on the key issues of what’s known as the container royalty fee and the Master Contract Wage Scale, including a guaranteed eight-hour workday. USMX wants to cap and eventually eliminate the royalty fees. In a release issued on Dec. 27 announcing the latest temporary extension of the collective bargaining agreement, the ILA announced some progress in negotiations around the central issue of the container royalty fee.

Where does the struggle go from here?

A potential coastalwide strike by the ILA would have huge implications for the U.S. labor movement, especially in this period. This struggle deserves continued attention as the new deadline of Feb. 6 approaches.

The Southern Workers Assembly has also recently released a petition calling on President Obama not to invoke Taft-Hartley in the event of a strike by the ILA. You can sign that petition at this ­address: ­southernworker.org/ilarighttostrikepetition/

64 Comments

I love these port strikes - in a round a bout way it draws attention to products being brought into the USA market place and tangentially brings public thought to off-shored product as well as foreign born product being able to under cut domestic made product. This along with unfair labor practice in the USA.

What ever happened to truth in reporting? Are back to the days of yellow journalism? Worse is our journalism written and over the air - now captive to corpoRAT ownership? Does what reaches the public have to pass an owners approval? Or fit with the owners view point or ambitions? Do we need a friendly ( to the people ) outside country or countries to hack into our airwaves to deliver real news to the USA Public?

I'm just thinking the amount of truth and real issues that could be aired in that time - an expansion on Exxon for one showing also fossil fuel extraction destruction from practices like fracking or mountain top removal mining or coal ash fields from power plant waste..................

By the way i really like that one Because BP means Bad People ( addition if I may ) doing Bad Practices using Bad Processes

I doubt that anyone is under any illusions here. But, check out the ports and the money that moves through. I would rather see a large response from the people ( to combat shit like the douche bag Rick Scott) that support not invoking Taft-Hartley even if it is simply for posterity.

Look at the number of ports and the amount of cash that moves through. To shut that shit down could be the tipping point.

I hope they bring commerce to a grinding halt and I hope they form some real picket lines with some real backing from the old school "union thugs" , you want to whine about "union thugs" you try to cross that picket line you may just find out about "union thugs". I hope Obama invokes the act and that the workers stand their ground forcing a physical face off.

I think the labor movement needs to fight battles it can win. To win, it needs the support of the general population. I'd advise it to sever its divisive ties with the D-wing corporatists and align itself with independents. It must begin to address issues affecting our entire society -- e.g., the loss of our democracy, the destruction of the Bill of Rights, the corruption of our foreign policy, the economic disparity, the war against the bottom 99%, the domination by the "Fed" banksters.

I've read that the AFL-CIO, in the Cold War period, spent more abroad, on subsidies to CIA union fronts, than it spent here at home on organizing workers. Unions need to decide which master to serve. Do they serve the flag-waving war-making system, or do they serve the people?

Really? The reality is that you don't support union action and you are desperately looking for anything to justify this stance and still come off as a rational human being and not a big jerk.

The problem is that this has become repetitive over the last year. Utilized by those that were trying to coopt. You know? Same group that wanted inclusiveness but wanted to privatize social security, the public education system and the like.

I certainly DO support "union action", if the action benefits the working class as a whole. What I don't support is self-defeating action -- narrowly focused action that turns most people against unions. I'm asking unions to assume a leadership role in society: They need to distance themselves from the system and side explicitly with the whole people.

Social Security and Medicare are two things the government does right. That's because the programs run themselves, without a lot of input from our "Elected Politicians". Single Payer is, by far, the most efficient way to deliver health care to everyone.

Public education produces a mindless regimented society, but private education also has its problems, so I'm not sure what the answer is: Maybe we need a mixture of the two.

I support the Commons -- sharing resources, cooperative society. But when things are jointly owned, it's sometimes hard to get people to take responsibility and show initiative.

This is good to see! I hope the days of labor-traitors like Meany and Kirkland are finally behind us.

But Hoffa can do more. He is still narrowly focused on worker rights. I'd like to see him stand up for the Bill of Rights, which are now under attack by the D-and-R Establishment.

Hoffa wants to "ensure a corruption-free union", but we also need a corruption-free government! When will the Teamsters help us to take back our country? When will they sever their ties with the D-wing of the War Party? When will they become an INDEPENDENT force in American politics?

That's what really pisses you off, doesn't it? It isn't the fact that you find unions don't fight for all people. The reality is that you don't support union action and you are desperately looking for anything to justify this stance and still come off as a rational human being and not a big jerk.

Public education produces a mindless regimented society, but private education also has its problems, so I'm not sure what the answer is: Maybe we need a mixture of the two.

When you are forced into rote memorization due to the testing scam. That thing the teacher's union informed you of twenty years ago?

You have had ample time to bring yourself up to date with the public education system, the faux privatization, and the testing scam.

I'm not the one here who is "pissed off" (your term), GirlFriday. I'm actually rather amused as I watch you "desperately" (your term) trying to stereotype me, categorize me, and tell me what I think.

Your accusations make no sense. Why would I NOT support "union action"? Why would I favor rote memorization? You seem to regard me as some sort of demon. In reality, I'm an open-minded human being looking for a way to contribute to the movement to take back our country and revive the public commons.

Again, it's nice of you to reply. And thank you for all of the down-votes: I must be doing something right!

You puzzle me, GirlFriday. You have made no effort to dialogue with me or enlist me in your cause. Just the opposite: you have tried to thwart my desire for cooperation and communication. Are you trying to build the movement? or destroy it? What is your mission here?

You are indeed wasting your time when you post insulting replies. If you want to use yor time more wisely, I advise you to make an effort communicate honestly, respectfully and intelligently.

Why would I enlist you in my cause? You keep thinking that it is I that should move to you. You have had ample time (over 20 years) to look at the faux privatization of education. You have had ample time to look at RTW states and to analyze the benefits of union action. So, the question is..........what is your mission here?

I'm not going to treat you like an idiot. I'm not going to baby you. You are an adult. You are, at least, a semi-educated adult.

It's nice to know that all of my words are being noted and put down in a book somewhere. And it's nice to know that somebody compares my every word with the current party-line and notes every deviation, however slight. Thanks for helping to keep me in line.

You attach far more weight to my words than I do. I didn't realize that my random exploratory comments would be treated as monumental.

What exactly did I say, again? I recall saying something mildly critical about labor unions, and something mildly critical about public education. For these unthinkable sins, I suppose I am now damned for all eternity.

I agree! We paleoconservatives are no fans of Wall Street -- and the revolving door between the "Fed", Goldman Sachs, and the Treasury Department.

We lost our freedom in 1913, in the dead of night on Christmas Eve, when Congress handed our currency over to a private banking conglomerate -- the misnamed "Federal Reserve". We need to abolish this conglomerate's debt-based currency and replace it with government-issued debt-free currency.

The deal has been sealed.I have not seen Obama do anything to help labor in the past for years.But he does give a good speach.Remember he did nothing for workers in Wisconsin.Nothing on minimum wage.Nothing on card check.Nothing on an all out assult on our public institutions to privatise.But again he does give a good speach.

I have to say that your inaction does more to help one side over the other than if you were to sign the petition. Your inaction, you not signing the petition, allows one of the disputing parties to use the government stick to beat the other side into submission. If you sign the petition and the president goes along with it then both sides have to work it out without government interference. You, my friend, are choosing a side through your lack of participation, the wrong side I might add.